Local schools' funds unclear in Kasich plan

Officials waiting to see details of Kasich's proposal

Feb. 4, 2013

Written by

CentralOhio.com

Schools and property taxes

Gov. John Kasich’s plan divvies state money to schools based on each district’s property values, essentially meaning that the lower a district’s per pupil property value, the more state aid it will receive. The values for local districts:

School district

County

Assessed value per pupil in FY12

Per pupil revenue raised by 1 mill in FY12

Westfall Local

Pickaway

$144,356.01

$144.36

Logan Elm Local

Pickaway

$131,480.01

$131.48

Teays Valley Local

Pickaway

$118,535.94

$118.54

Circleville City

Pickaway

$113,820.11

$113.82

Waverly City

Pike

$88,913.67

$88.91

Scioto Valley Local

Pike

$64,560.06

$64.56

Eastern Local

Pike

$55,010.33

$55.01

Western Local

Pike

$44,809.09

$44.81

Chillicothe City

Ross

$122,442.11

$122.44

Zane Trace Local

Ross

$109,400.14

$109.40

Union Scioto Local

Ross

$92,689.47

$92.69

Adena Local

Ross

$91,619.99

$91.62

Paint Valley Local

Ross

$78,932.72

$78.93

Southeastern Local

Ross

$71,889.68

$71.89

Huntington Local

Ross

$48,482.73

$48.48

Source: Ohio Department of Education

More

ADVERTISEMENT

Gov. John Kasich’s education funding plan fundamentally changes how the state will support local education, but it remains to be seen how that will affect individual school districts.

Kasich on Thursday unveiled his school funding plan, which outlines spending of $7.4 billion in the next fiscal year and $7.7 billion in the following one — the state is spending $6.9 billion in the current fiscal year. The district-level details for the plan, however, are not expected to be released until late next week, showing what it would mean financially.

Piet van Lier, with the progressive Policy Matters Ohio, said the general formula and the governor’s focus on poorer districts are positive, but it is too early to say the plan actually accomplishes those goals.

“The stated focus on equity is positive,” he said. “We just need to make sure that’s happening.”

At its most basic, the plan would send additional funding to districts with lower property valuations. For example, a district with a $100,000 valuation per pupil would get funding to make its base 20 mills of property taxes the same as a district with a $250,000 valuation. Such a district would get $150 per pupil for each of those 20 mills or $3,000.

Only 4 percent of Ohio schools are above this $250,000 threshold.

That means poorer districts would receive more money under the guarantee than wealthier districts, as the state would have more of a gap to fill to hit the minimum. In reality, it essentially creates a $5,000 minimum of state and local support per student.

The percent of that minimum to come from the state depends on local property tax values.

In Ross County, the property values ranged from $48,482 per student in Huntington Local Schools — the second-lowest amount in the state — to $122,442 per student at Chillicothe City Schools.

The governor, however, made it clear that no district would see fewer dollars under the plan. In addition to the baseline help, 80 percent of districts would receive additional support based on their property values and household incomes.

Chillicothe City Schools Superintendent Jon Saxton was among the school administrators who heard Kasich’s pitch in person Thursday in Columbus.

“We went up there bracing for what we thought would be bad news,” Saxton said.

Instead, Saxton was pleasantly surprised, at least when it came to the proposed boost in state aid and creation of the $300 million “Straight-A Fund” that would reward innovative school districts with one-time grants.

Saxton said he thinks Chillicothe already is doing some innovative things and is “ready to step up to the plate” to secure some of that funding.

Still, Saxton said any funding model that fails to address the issue of open enrollment — which has plagued the district — is not complete.

“Until something is done to regulate that, we still have a problem,” he said.

Union-Scioto Local Schools Treasurer John Rose said he’s hesitant to judge Kasich’s proposal until he sees the “nuts and bolts.”

“I try not to get too caught up with a few numbers until I can see the full proposal,” he said.

Rose did say “any increase in funding is welcome” but the state has yet to restore schools to the levels of funding from several years ago, when stimulus dollars were used as stabilization funds for education.

“All that sounds good and I hope that’s the case,” Warne said of Kasich‘s proposed increase to state aid. “But I’m like the other superintendents: Show me the money.”

Warne continued: “At least he says he’s got a plan, and if he says he can fund it, let’s give him the benefit of the doubt.”

Adena still is reeling from the loss of revenue from a now-expired 1 percent income tax levy, Warne said. Voters twice defeated the levy’s renewal, while the district is spending $1 million more than it takes in annually and is eating into its cash reserve.

“Although (the increase in basic state aid) helps, it won’t solve all of our problems,” he said.

Michele Prater, spokeswoman for the Ohio Education Association, said the governor’s plan didn’t restore previous cuts to schools — which she called “detrimental” to students. Even so, she said it was too early to say whether the overall plan was moving in the right direction.

“Until we have the exact budget language and exact appropriation of dollars, I can’t comment on the specifics of the proposal,” she said.

However, her organization, which represents more than 121,000 educators in Ohio, did criticize the governor before his announcement for not including OEA in creating the plan.

Rep. Gerald Stebelton, R-Lancaster, chairman of the House education committee, declined to comment on the proposal until he could see the actual legislation.

Voucher expansion

Kasich’s plan also expands the state’s voucher program to families in homes with income of 200 percent or less of the poverty line — about $46,100 for a family of four. Current law provides vouchers only for families in failing districts.

In the first year, the vouchers would be open to kindergarten students; they would be expanded to include first graders in the second year. Kasich dismissed questions about whether that means the program would have to keep expanding in the future to provide vouchers for those students as they enter later grades. In fact, he said it was a mistake to focus on the voucher portion of the plan.

“Of all things unveiled today, the voucher program is a very small part,” he said Thursday.

But supporters and proponents of school choice see this step as the beginning of a much larger program. Basically, if the state is going to open it to the first two grades in the first two years, it is safe to assume it will be expanded to later grades in later years they said.

“Absolutely, it’s our hope that’s what happens,” said Matt Cox, president of School Choice Ohio.

Cox said his group has always believed that any parent who can’t afford private school should be given an opportunity to take advantage of those choices.

Damon AsburyCQ, director of legislative services for the Ohio School Board Association, said he does not support the voucher program, noting he would rather see the money invested in early childhood education in public schools. But he agreed that the plan appeared destined for expansion in future years for additional grades.

Under the governor’s plan, charter schools, which received $775 million last year from the state, will enjoy a 2 percent or more increase in per-student funding and $100 per student for facilities’ costs, long a complaint among operators.

Unanswered questions

Many school officials said that, although they liked the framework of the governor’s proposal, they will need to see more details before they know if it really works.

Asbury said while the funding formula is different, the only thing that really matters to the district is the funding to come from the formula.

And the governor made clear his disdain for district guarantees — money given to schools that are losing enrollment — but he said it would be too chaotic to eliminate that money initially. Asbury and others said that means the money might be removed in future budgets, depending on who is governor at that time.

But Asbury said the $300 million in innovation grants for districts is a good thing to help them become more efficient or better at educating.

Those grants will only be available once, and if guarantee money is eliminated in future budgets, schools across Ohio will basically be back to where they started, Policy Matters’ van Lier said.

Although the governor insists his plan is constitutional, a group representing Appalachian schools said that question remains unanswered.

“Candidly, it’s too early to tell,” said Dick Murray, interim executive director of the Coalition of Rural and Appalachian Schools. “Until you reduce the reliance on local property taxes, you’re not getting to the constitutional piece.”

Murray said he was glad to hear the governor talk about getting more money to high-poverty areas but was disappointed to not hear any mention of teacher training or additional early-childhood education.